West Visayas State University

(Formerly Iloilo Normal School)

HIMAMAYLAN CITY CAMPUS
Brgy. Caradio-an, Himamaylan City, Negros Occidental,6108
* Tel.No. (034)-388-3300
*Official Page: https://www.facebook.com/westhimamaylan/
Email Address: himamaylan@wvsu.edu.ph

FINAL
Part 2
[

1
 MODULE 10
MORAL DEVELOPMENT AND MORAL REASONING

I. MOST ESSENTIAL LEARNING OUTCOMES

At the end of this module, the learners are expected to:

 Expound their self-made definition of ethics in application to good judgement
 Apply principles discussed previously, in the conditions of decision making
 Enhance previous knowledge relevant to the topic being discussed

II. INTRODUCTION

Contrary to popular belief, the real issue in ethics is not taste or inclination or preference. It is
developing an ethical approach to living, whichever method of justification you use. Aristotle called it a
combination of action, desire, and feeling. This requires the use of judgment so that you may apply what
you believe to be right to the situation at hand. Having ethical principles alone isn’t enough. As legal
scholar and philosopher David Luban explains,
moral decision-making “also requires good judgment, by which I mean knowing which actions
violate a moral principle and which do not.”
He continues,
“You can’t teach good judgment through general rules, because you already need judgment to know
how rules apply.”
His conclusion applies to the point of this book.
“Judgment is therefore always and irredeemably particular.”
In philosophy and ethics you are one of the subjects of our own inquiry. If an ethical life matters
to us, you must already be committed to particular values and principles. You therefore inevitably view
things through our own interests and experiences. All of us are products of biology, history and social
institutions, each of which shapes our understanding and beliefs regarding what it means to be human.
In ethics, reason can never be divorced from the particularity of individual lives. Ethics is difficult
precisely because it is so close and matters so much.

III. LESSON INPUTS

There's No Choice but to Choose

Whether you agree or not, Ethics has been a difficult course to teach and learn. But I personally
remember a lot while stuyding this. I know that accepting my Dean’s challenge to teach this course
would only be a personal disaster. Epicures, a classic Philosopher explained why.

"Let no one when young delay to study philosophy, nor when he is old grow weary of his study.
For no one can come too early or too late to secure the health of his soul."

To secure the health of my soul I need to turn to a variety of sources. An analogy to our physical
health is instructive. In the past, few gave much thought to the food they ate. Buttered biscuits,
sausages, candy and ice cream — all delicious but deadly in large amounts. Now you know that what
you put into our mouths and exercise affect our health.

2
 Yet you may still be confused by all the information available to us. Running is good for us —
running ruins the knees; red meat is bad for us — red meat provides essential nutrients; sunlight is a
healing agent for depression — sunlight causes cancer. Ethics confronts us in a similar manner. Many
voices compete for our attention, each persuading, cajoling, hectoring, demanding that you do the right
thing. However, just as with health issues, you can turn to others for moral guidance. First, you sift the
quacks from the serious, using our intelligence, experience, imagination and emotions to decide the
difference. You read what you can from wisdom of the world's religions and you try to understand the
great ethical philosophers who have contributed to our heritage. Next, you look to contemporary guides,
people whose judgment you trust, those who seem to me to be examples of what they preach. You talk
and discuss, you listen and argue using the pertinent laws that we have tackled. Then you try as best
you can to understand all the relevant facts about the issue in front of us. You use our conscience,
paying close attention to how you feel, what you think, what you believe. Finally, you take the interests
of others into account, attempting to understand the world through the eyes of those most likely to be
affected by our action. Then you apply my judgment.
As with the food you eat, unavoidably you are the final arbiter. We cannot escape this
responsibility. This is a bother, but there is “no other route as long as I am concerned with the health of
my soul.”
Sometimes you are confronted with competing claims, each important in its own right. You can
even imagine situations where the claims upon us are equal and equally important. Jean Paul Sartre
imagined such a drama when he wrote about a young man during WWII who was the only caretaker for
his chronically ill mother. The Nazis were approaching his town. He was needed by the Resistance in
order to defeat the invaders. But if he went to fight the noble and necessary cause, his mother would
die.
Facing ethical choices may discourage you from choosing at all. But choice itself is built into the
human condition. Ants don’t decide between love and justice, human life and art. They live by instincts
alone. Humans are different. Instincts may guide us on the most basic level — hungry, eat; tired, sleep;
frightened, run-away. Yet even here there are choices: eat what and sleep where? And you all know
that running away when endangered may not always be a good idea. I learned in my brief teaching
experience here in WVSU that when a student is about to fail the course, I should be bothered, figure
out was going on, then act.
So you must choose or someone else will choose for us. Even not to choose is a choice —
sometimes a good and wise thing to do, sometimes not. The point is to be aware of our choices and to
act in the best way possible.

Steps to Take
Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson, two political philosophers offer this way to approach
ethical problems. They call it “standards of deliberation.” First, every appeal to reason or principles you
use must be one that could be accepted by other reasonable people. This means that there must be a
degree of consistency, coherence and logic to what you say. Second, the factual claims you make must
be testable by reliable and nonprivate methods. You can’t say something like “You broke my arm,” but
not let anyone else see your arm. You have to allow your arm to be seen and examined by those who
know what broken arms are. You can’t refuse to share information your have or claim that it the fact just
because it “feels right” or “because I said so.” Third, all your reasons must be offered in public. You
shouldn’t solve ethical problems based on secret information.This is unfair to others, as it puts them at a
disadvantage.
More specifically, here are a series of steps you can use in making an ethical decision:

1. What are the facts? Know the facts as best you can. If your facts are wrong, you’re
liable to make a bad choice.
2. What can you guess about the facts you don’t know? Since it is impossible to
know all the facts, make reasonable assumptions about the missing pieces of information.

3
 3. What do the facts mean? Facts by themselves have no meaning. You need to
interpret the information in light of the values that are important to you.
4. What does the problem look like through the eyes of the various people
involved? The ability to walk in another’s shoes is essential. Understanding the problem
through a variety of perspectives increases the possibility that you will choose wisely.
5. What will happen if you choose one thing rather than another? All actions have
consequences. Make a reasonable guess as to what will happen if you follow a particular
course of action. Decide whether you think more good or harm or good will come of your action.
6. What do your feelings tell you? Feelings are facts, too. Your feelings about ethical
issues may give you a clue as to parts of your decision that your rational mind may overlook.
7. What will you think of yourself is you decide one thing or another? Some call
this our conscience. It is a form of self-appraisal. It helps us decide whether you are the kinds
of people who would like to be. It helps us to live with ourselves.
8. Can you explain and justify your decision to others? Your behavior shouldn't be
based on a whim. Neither should it be self-centered. Ethics involves you in the life of the world
around you. For this reason, you must be able to justify your moral decisions in ways that
reasonable to reasonable people. Ethical reasons can't be private reasons.

Earlier in this century, the great American ethical philosopher Morris Raphael Cohen wrote that
without moral choice, “there is no genuinely human life, but only slavish adherence to mechanically rigid
rules which choke the currents of ever-changing life.”
The choice, then, is between thinking things out for ourselves, judging and acting on those
ethical values — however uncertain you may be about them — or living like slaves, afraid of risks,
waiting for someone else to tell us what to do. While you have a moral vocabulary from which to
construct our answers, there is no text, which by itself can tell what is right or wrong for each and every
situation. Knowing this and acting nevertheless is the essence of responsibility and free will.

Moral Development

To decide better, a person needs to develop his/her moral reasoning skills. The world offers a
variety of ways to achieve this. But what does Philosophy say about this matter? Here are the three
ways to develop our moral reasoning:

1. Caring
Ethical philosophers and many religious leaders think about morality all the time. What is right?
What is wrong? What values should guide our lives? What do you owe others? What is fair? What does
it mean to be good? What is a good life? These, and questions like them, become their life work.
But how does someone become a good person? Aristotle, when asked this question, answered
by counseling, Find a virtuous person and watch what he does. This is still good advice, as far as it goes.
Imitation has its limits, though, since you only see what a person does but not why he's done it. Why
sacrifice yourself for the sake of a friend? Why return something that you have found? Why fulfill a
promise even if it is costly to you?
Once you ask "Why should I do this instead of that?" you are in the realm of judgment. And here
psychologists have something to tell us about how and why people make the moral choices they do.
Obviously, it has something to do with how you are raised. If you have confidence in yourself, you
probably have the courage of your convictions. If you were raised in a home with respect, you can
extend respect to others. But your childhood is literally in the past. Is there anything you can do now that
can help raise the level of your ethical competence?
The answer is yes. First, in the area of caring and compassion, you know that reading fiction,
history and biographies all make people more sensitive to the lives of others. Literature of this sort

4
connects you to others in a way that helps you see the world through their eyes. This is the first step.
Without care nothing else can happen.

2. Judging
The second thing you can do is to think about ethical problems. There are increasing levels of
sophistication in reasoning about ethics. Many psychologists accept the schema arranged by Lawrence
Kohlberg in which he outlined five stages of moral development.

The first stage claims that the reason for doing the right thing is to avoid punishment.
The second stage argues that the right thing is that which serves your own interests.
The third stage argues that you do the right thing is so others will think well of you.
The fourth stage reasons that you do the right thing in order that society as a whole
can function.
The fifth stage accepts the right thing as that which promotes the welfare of all people
and protects everyone's rights.

The better you reason, the more morally competent you are. This is much like saying that the
better you understand math the better mathematician you are. Of course, you can occasionally guess
the right answer and there are idiot savants who do amazing mathematical feats without having a clue
how they arrived at the right answers.
Furthermore, you can know everything you need to know about math and choose never to
balance your checkbook. I assume, though, if you've gotten this far in the book, you are interested in
"doing ethics."

3. Taking a Test and Talking

A way to improve your level of reasoning about ethics is to discuss ethical problems with other
people, rather than simply think about them on your own. Moral development is spurred by your hearing
other thoughtful responses to moral problems. Reflection best takes place when you hear what others
think and you explain your reasoning to other thoughtful people.
So here are three more dilemma for you to think about (see Self Assessment part). Find others who
are willing to read them and talk about their answers with you. You can discuss other stories when you
are done. Ethical problems are all around us. Hardly a day goes by that an ethical dilemma doesn't
confront you. Nearly every day you can find a moral issue in the news. So form your own ethical
discussion group. It's challenging and it’s fun.

IV. SUMMARY
 Sometimes you are confronted with competing claims, each important in its own right. You can
even imagine situations where the claims upon us are equal and equally important.
 As with the food you eat, unavoidably you are the final arbiter. We cannot escape this responsibility.
 The better you reason, the more morally competent you are. This is much like saying that the better
you understand math the better mathematician you are.

5
V. SELF-ASSESSMENT

Read the following moral dilemma and try to jot down your reactions in a piece of paper. Prepare for
an oral recitation during the scheduled live meeting with your instructor.

1. Norma worked in a clothing factory for twenty years. Her husband died ten years ago, leaving her
with a young child. The company went bankrupt recently, leaving Norma without work. She has no
money in the bank, no assets and no pension. She finds a job paying the minimum wage without health
benefits in a drug store. Norma's daughter develops an illness that is fatal, unless it is treated quickly
with an expensive drug. Norma thinks that she can take the required number of pills from the drugstore
without them being missed. What should Norma do? Do you favor her taking the drug?
2. The board of deacons of a church was having trouble with their pastor. Although the church owned
the pastor's house, Rev. Cruz paid the mortgage directly to the bank himself. When he missed several
payments, the bank threatened to seize the house. Few members outside the board knew this and Rev.
Cruz was very popular with most other parishioners. The board had the power to fire the pastor but they
decided to hold a congregation-wide meeting to explain their concerns and to get the views of all the
members
When the board mentioned their thoughts about dismissing the pastor, so the meeting got out of
hand before a full explanation could be offered. The meeting was postponed until tempers could cool.
Things just went from bad to worse. Arguments broke out in the pews and the board of deacons
received threatening letters. The board thought they might call off the next meeting and proceed to fire
the minister straightaway. Do you favor the board of deacons calling off the next meeting?

3. Horace worked in the human resources department that was interviewing applicants for a top job in a
widget company. After reading many applications, one stood out way ahead of the others. Then he
realized that he knew applicant, Jerral. They had hung out together when they were teenagers. Jerral
had been a wild kid and once was arrested for shoplifting and the possession of marijuana. Jerral had
completed mandatory counseling and, as far as Horace knew, Jerral had straightened out his life and
had done well during the last twenty years.
Jerral hadn't indicated in his application that he had once been arrested and Horace feared that the
company would never hire someone with a police record, no matter how minor or how long ago. Do you
favor Horace revealing the information?

6
 MODULE 11
GENDER AND SEXUALITY ETHICS

I. MOST ESSENTIAL LEARNING OUTCOMES

At the end of this module, the learners are expected to:

 Describe the history of sex and gender from an ethical standpoint
 Explain how sociologists and ethicists are trying to keep up with the rapid recent social
changes in how sex, gender, and sexual orientation are viewed

II. INTRODUCTION

Every society is diverse, and to assume there’s one way to “properly” be a member of that society is
not fair to either longtime residents or to new arrivals. The terms “sex” and “gender” are often used
interchangeably. As used by sociologists, the word sex refers to a person’s biological sex; with a few
exceptions, this is unambiguously male or female. Gender is a more complicated term that refers to a
role that a person identifies with; it may or may not correspond to a person’s biological sex.

III. LESSON INPUTS

The Women’s Movement and its Discontents

Women can have babies. Men can’t. After the babies are born, women can nurse them. Men can’t.
The basic biological differences between men and women have always led to them having different
roles in societies. As societies grew and institutionalized — that is, created social institutions such as
businesses and governments, with elaborate codes of law — these differences became formalized in
specific rules about what men and women could do.
This played out differently in each society, but in most societies around the world, it was made
difficult or impossible for women to take formal leadership roles. In many societies women were for a
long time unable to own property or vote. As with racial discrimination, sex discrimination came under
increasing challenge as the principle of equality that fueled the revolutions of the 18th and 19th
centuries spread, and as science made increasingly clear that there were no significant differences
between men and women in intellect or ability. An international suffrage movement around the turn of
the 20th century earned women the right to vote in most countries around the world, and other legal
barriers to women’s equality began quickly to drop away.
But even as formal distinctions between men and women fell away, many informal distinctions
remained. In the postwar “Baby Boom,” women were still typically expected to stay at home and care for
the children and the home while their husbands went off to bring home the bacon. This theoretical ideal
was never actually as widespread as it seemed, but many women felt suffocated by the expectation that
they would inevitably find a life of domesticity more rewarding than any alternative.
A wave of influential thinkers — Betty Friedan, Gloria Steinem, and others — called for a complete
rethinking of the roles of women in society, and millions of women around the world actively resisted
being pigeonholed in the role of passive nurturer. In part because of this cultural shift and in part
because of an economic recession, women entered the workforce in record numbers, and today it’s
normal for women in many, if not most, societies around the world to have independent careers in
addition to, or instead of, raising children.
Today, many young women prefer not to identify themselves as “feminists.” The term is often
associated with a strident political stance, and some women believe that the success of the women’s
movement created challenges for women who freely choose, for example, to leave their jobs to raise
children. Some feel that the new challenge for feminists is to advocate for woman-friendly and
family-friendly laws and corporate policies that make it easier to take time off work for childbearing or

7
family responsibilities. Still, for all the success of the women’s movement, the fact of the matter is that
women continue to face negative discrimination in almost every society. Women’s earnings are still not
as high as those of men with comparable experience, and women are still underrepresented in
executive suites.
There are several reasons for the continuing disparity in career achievement between men and
women. A few of the most important include:
 Direct discrimination. In many cases, women face direct discrimination by men (or even
other women) who decline to hire them for high-paying positions or to pay them as much
as a man might earn in the same position. This discrimination continues to happen for
many of the same reasons that racial discrimination continues to happen..
 Different career timing. Though parental leave is today widely available for fathers as
well as mothers, women remain more likely than men to take time off for childbearing —
and to take more time off when they do. This time off can put them at a disadvantage when
competing for raises and promotions with colleagues who have been working continuously,
even if their total experience is comparable.
 A segmented labor market. Among careers, some are especially dominated by women
(nursing, teaching, library work) and others are especially dominated by men (construction
jobs, computing, engineering). On average, male-dominated fields are higher-paying. This
means that women are — whether by choice or for other reasons — concentrated in
relatively low-paying careers, and when they try to enter higher-paying careers, they are
especially vulnerable to discrimination.

Sociologists believe that race, ethnicity, sex, and gender aren’t “going away” any time soon. Those
concepts are grounded deep in the fabric of every society, and saying that they don’t matter any more is
simply false. No matter where you live, your physical features and biological sex are going to influence
how the people around you see you, and they’re going to influence how you see yourself.
Sex and gender are increasingly complicated categories that remain just as meaningful to
individuals as they were when they were simpler. Your sex, your gender, and your sexual orientation
are part of who you are, and though societies increasingly allow you to decide how and when you will
express your gender and your sexual orientation — and, also increasingly, forbid others to judge you by
them — that doesn’t mean that your sex and your gender don’t matter profoundly to you, and to others.
If you’re confused or frustrated trying to understand your own race, ethnicity, sex, or gender, you’re
not alone! Many groups exist to help people find support and advice about their identity, no matter what
it is. A visit to a counselor, a trip to the library, a quick Web search, or even a conversation with a caring
listener can help connect you with other people who are wrestling with the same concerns you are

LBGTQ Rights and the deconstruction of gender

“LGBTQ” is an alphabet soup of a term; it stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer.
Some members of the LGBTQ community identify with one of these terms, some identify with multiple of
them. Some people who identify with the term “gay” find the term “queer” to be derogatory and
inappropriate, while others who identify with a “queer” identity consider terms like “gay” and “lesbian” to
be restrictive and outmoded. So the term “LGBTQ” (or, sometimes, simply “LGBT”) is used to include
everyone whose sexual orientation is other than — or at least broader than — heterosexual.
The term is a little awkward — it doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue, and it unites people who don’t
necessarily always want to be united. But it’s become necessary as societies around the world have
increasingly come to see sexual orientation as something that individuals are free to determine for
themselves. Whether that means “straight,” whether it means “queer,” whether it means “lesbian,” or
whether it means something else is for each individual to say.
The widespread recognition of sexual orientations other than heterosexual as valid and healthy is
relatively new — it wasn’t that long ago that most psychologists considered homosexuality to be a
mental disorder — and it’s still unclear where laws and customs regarding sexual orientation will go in

8
the future. Many consider the debate over sexual orientation to be a moral debate, and you may be
among them; but remember that sociology is about looking at the big picture and setting aside your
personal views so that you can understand society objectively. From a sociological standpoint, the
debate over GBLTQ rights can be seen as the next step in the overall debate over sex and gender.
If you’re allowed to decide whether you work, where you work, and whom and when you marry
despite your biological sex, it follows logically that many people will want to decide for themselves who
they have sex with and when — and whether that other person is a man or a woman. However you feel
personally about the matter, the fact that sexual orientation is increasingly regarded as a matter of
personal choice is consistent with what sociologists would expect given many of the other sociological
ideas in this book. (By “personal choice,” I don’t mean to say that people aren’t born with one sexual
orientation or another. I mean to say that from a social and legal standpoint, people are increasingly
allowed to say for themselves what their sexual orientation is rather than being told by someone else
what it is.)
 Sociologists of culture are seeing a transition to “microcultures,” where groups of people
who identify with one another are able to come together from across a range of social
backgrounds. This means that people who consider themselves, say, queer can share a
common culture that may be different than mainstream cultures.
 Sociologists of race and ethnicity have seen that “race” is losing legitimacy as a
category people are born into and that determines what they can or should do with their
lives. Sex is changing in the same way — it’s increasingly seen as something individuals
can and should express for themselves.
 Sociologists studying social change from Durkheim to Weber, have all observed that
individuals are increasingly seen as having the right to say for themselves what they’ll do
and with whom they’ll associate. There’s no reason that association in bed should prove to
be an exception to that rule.

It’s often said that governments are getting “out of the bedroom,” but sociologist David John
Frank, who has studied international changes in sex laws, says that that’s not exactly true. On the one
hand, it is true that some sexual activities that were once forbidden by law — for example, gay sex —
have increasingly been permitted by law in countries around the world. On the other hand, some sexual
activities that were once permitted — for example, a husband forcing his wife to have sex with him —
have been increasingly made illegal. The common theme is that laws around the world have been
changing, for decades, in favor of allowing individuals to decide for themselves what intimate activities
they are going to participate in, and when, and with whom.

IV. SUMMARY

 Gender is an ascribed status that provides a basis for social differentiation.

 In the Philippines, the social construction of gender continues to define significantly different
expectations for females and males.
 Gender roles show up in our work and behavior and in how we react to others. Throughout
history, these roles have restricted women much more than they have men.
 Though men may exhibit a variety of different gender roles, called multiple masculinities,
society reinforces their traditional role of dominating women.
 Stratification exists by sexual as well as by gender identity. Not only gays but also transgender
people suffer from stigma.

9
V. SELF-ASSESSMENT

No Gender, Please: It’s Preschool!

Few schools receive as much global attention as did Egalia, a small, co-educational, state-supported
preschool that opened in Stockholm, Sweden, in 2010. Egalia follows a curriculum that omits gender
designations. Some of the school’s practices are not unusual in today’s educational environment: both boys and
girls are encouraged to use cooking utensils, build with blocks, and play with dolls and trucks. Blue and pink
designations are absent. But in addition, at Egalia staff members avoid using words like “him” or “her” (han or
hon in Swedish). They use the gender-neutral personal pronoun, hen, instead, to create a more egalitarian and
inclusive atmosphere. In 2015, the Swedish national encyclopedia accepted hen as a gender-neutral personal
pronoun.
From the color and placement of toys to the choice of books, every detail has been carefully planned to make
sure the children don’t fall into conventional gender stereotypes. “Society expects girls to be girlie, nice and
pretty and boys to be manly, rough and outgoing,” says Jenny Johnsson, a 31-year-old teacher. “Egalia gives
them a fantastic opportunity to be whoever they want to be.”
Some parents worry things have gone too far. An obsession with obliterating gender roles, they say,
could make the children confused and ill-prepared to face the world outside kindergarten. Since 1998 Swedish
preschools have been mandated by law to counteract traditional gender roles and gender patterns. However,
preschools often reproduce rather than counteract these gender roles and patterns. Many Swedes think that
preschools are not working hard enough to counteract traditional gender roles and patterns. The government
mandate is purposefully vague, so that unless a school has a very committed staff, as at Egalia, traditional gender
roles emerge.
Egalia works to create conditions for children to grow up free from expectations based on their gender.
Consequently, criticism abounds. Anonymous threats to employees and break-ins were widely covered in the
media. Some dismissed the school as an elite project that fails to address the real needs of society. Amidst
charges of “gender madness,” it became necessary for the head of Egalia to repeatedly stress to the media that the
school is not trying to eliminate children’s awareness of sex (dolls are anatomically correct, for example), or to
make everyone homosexual. The latter criticism came in response to the media attention given to the children’s
picture books, which emphasize single parents and gay couples—no Cinderella stories here!
Praise is easy to find too. The preschool has a long waiting list. The local district showcases Egalia as a
model for all its preschools and considers its gender approach a resource for educating preschool employees. Yet
there is little evidence that teachers in other nearby preschools have any real knowledge about the presentation of
gender roles at Egalia besides what they see in the media.
Researchers would be interested in studying the long-term impact of an Egalia-like education. Perhaps it will
help eliminate gender differences, or perhaps the influence of the mass media and experiences outside the school
will undercut the mission of such programs.

Sources: Lind-Valdan 2014; Noack 2015; Soffel 2011

Ask yourself and answer the following questions. Try to jot down your reactions in a piece of paper.
Prepare for an oral recitation during the scheduled live meeting with your instructor.

1. Think back to your early educational experiences (day care, preschool, and kindergarten). Did they
reinforce or help eliminate societal gender role stereotypes?
2. To what extent do you think preschool or education in general can change gender role stereotypes?

10
 MODULE 12
ETHICS OF PEACE AND WARFARE

I. MOST ESSENTIAL LEARNING OUTCOMES

At the end of this module, students will be able to:

 Assess the current trends in the Global political system
 Relate ethics and the peace process
 Derive ideas and practical implications of various perspective of ethics in peace and warfare

II. INTRODUCTION

Thoughts to Ponder from “The Art of War”:

“He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight”
- Sun Tzu (Chinese Philosopher)

Fff

Si vis pacem para bellum

“If you want peace, prepare for war.”
(Vegetius, Roman General)

11
III. LESSON INPUTS

Major Types of War

1. Contemporary War - a war which originates out of conflict over limited resources and personal
wealth, beliefs, and ideologies. Definition may vary over time, hence contemporary.
a) Intranational - within a particular political entity
(ex. NPA rebels vs the Government )
b) International - between two or more political entities
(ex.: Spanish-American War)
2. Total War - a war that directly or/and indirectly affects the entire globe in terms of economy and
movement of people (ex.: World War I and II). This war results into economic and even psycho-social
depression. In the past total wars, casualties made a significant decrease in the world’s population.
3. Classical War - originates out of the desire of a country to take over the territory of another
country. This type of war is rooted on the expansionist perspective of national development that rose in
15th centruy Europe.
4. Post-modern War - this is a new type of war that relatively deviates from the aforementioned
types. Post-modern wars may use soft power (culture), biotechnology (diseases, medicines, etc.), and
even nuclear power as major weapons of warfare.

“The major sources of war in the future will derive less from the character of relations between states
that what goes on within states”
- Prof. Kevin Holsti
A TYPOLOGY ON THE THEORIES OF WAR

ACTOR SOURCES OF WAR CAUSES OF WAR

Human Nature
Leadership
Human Condition
TheIndividual Misperception
LossofControl
Expected Utilityof War

Economic Structure
Military-Industrial
TheNation-State Behaviour of States
Undemocratic Regimes
Nationalism

Power Symmetry
TheInternational System Power Transition International System
Arm Races

Principles on the “Just War” Doctrine

It is accepted globally that no one wins in a war but it does not conclusively implies that wars
are not needed. In order to justify the sovereignty of individual states and to highlight peace and
patrimony as an undeniable global goal, wars should never be ceased.

1. Jus ad Bellum (on war decision)

a. Just Cause - warring states should ensure that there is justifiable reasons for both states to
engage in war

12
 b. Last Resort - If and only if all possible means have been exerted by warring states to settle
the dispute, but peace has not been attained, that’s the time when states will decide to
engage in war
c. Competent Authority - states desiring to declare war should ensure that their authority is
capable to handle crisis that the war may brought to its peoples
d. Limited Objectives - if the goals of war have been achieved, warring states should declare
surrender. Therefore, setting goals for war should only accomplish the prime reason why
the dispute started
e. Reasonable Hope of Success - if a state engage in war cannot secure success at the end
of warfare, then there should be no war

2. Jus in Bello (on war conduct)

a. Discrimination/Distinction - no civilians should be harmed in the duration of the war
b. Proportionality - Otherwise agreed beforehand, warring states should not explicitly destroy
everything in the “war zone” or in their respective territories
c. Fair treatment to prisoners of war - war prisoners of an enemy country should be treated
fairly and with humanity
d. No means for mala in se - military or any private person should not use the event of war as
a chance to commit crime

IV. SUMMARY

 It is accepted globally that no one wins in a war

 War does not conclusively implies that wars are not needed.
 In order to justify the sovereignty of individual states and to highlight peace and patrimony as
an undeniable global goal, wars should never be ceased.

V. SELF-ASSESSMENT
Read and analyze the following questions below. This will test will not be recorded but will
assess the basic knowledge that you have gained in this lesson.

1. The CPP-NPA rebellion against the government is founded on the ideology of ______.
a) Buddhism c) Anarchism
b) Maoism d) Authoritarianism
2. It states that warring states should ensure that there is justifiable reasons for both states to engage in
war.
a) Just Cause c) Last Resort
b) Competent Authority d) Limited Objectives
3. It states that if the goals of war have been achieved, warring states should declare surrender.
Therefore, setting goals for war should only accomplish the prime reason why the dispute started
a) Just Cause c) Last Resort
b) Competent Authority d) Limited Objectives
4. This cause of war is sourced from interceding power conflicts, political transitions, and arm races.
a) The Individual b) Behavior of States
b) The International System d) All of the above
5. This type of war originates out of the desire of a country to take over the territory of another country.
a) Total War b) International War
b) Contemporary War d) Classical War

13
 ETHICS
FINAL

References and Resources:

Digman, J. M. (1997). Higher-order factors of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 73, 1246–1256.
Frei, R. L., & McDaniel, M. A. (1998). Validity of customer service measures in personnel selection:
A review of criterion and construct evidence. Human Performance, 11, 1–27.
Hogan, R. (1983). Socioanalytic theory of personality. In M. M. Page (Ed.), 1982 Nebraska
symposium on motivation: Personality—Current theory and research (pp. 55–89). Lincoln: University of
Nebraska Press.
Hogan, R., & Blake, R. (1999). John Holland’s vocational typology and personality theory. Journal
of Vocational Behavior, 55, 41–56.
Holland, J. L. (1985). Manual for the self-directed search. Odessa, FL:Psychological Assessment
Resources.
Hough, L. M. (1992). The “Big Five” personality variables–construct confusion: Description versus
prediction. Human Performance, 5,139–155.
Hough, L. M., Eaton, N. K., Dunnette, M. D., Kamp, J. D., & McCloy, R. A. (1990).
Criterion-related validities of personality constructs and the effect of response distortion on those
validities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 581–595.
Judge, T. A., Heller, D., & Mount, M. K. (2001). Five-Factor Model of personality and job
satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 530–541

Prepared by:

ALVIN KRIS B. ALIC

Instructor

14
15